Jump to content

Interesting Article Re Byu Student Fighting Racism


Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

No, it's not.  Not legally anyway.

By that standard we have racism, child abuse, wage theft, and public urination are also not "still around". Making something illegal does not necessarily end it.

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

In principle we did.  Fully abolishing it took a while.

Yes, and that is the case with almost all societal ills. Slavery is still around.

2 hours ago, smac97 said:

The same, I think, can be said with contemporary American capitalism.  It has evolved and improved over time.  And thank goodness for that.

I just think you are completely wrong about ascribing that change to capitalism. Capitalism does not independently have a morality. The people who practice it might. That legal chattel slavery ended when it started to become unprofitable does not speak well to the system having any kind of morality. Changes in technology were the primary motivator. So what does that mean if technology starts making slavery profitable again?

  • Like 4
Link to post
On 8/3/2020 at 3:22 PM, MiserereNobis said:

I think I might understand what @stemelbow is getting at. Let me know.

1) The priesthood ban is "racist" in the sense that it negatively discriminates against someone based on their race. Blacks were not given the priesthood nor allowed into temples, including eternal marriage, which is the pinnacle of LDS ritual, right? (side question: during the time of the ban, could people do work for dead Blacks in the temple?)

2) Now, if Brigham Young and others gave the ban without God's approval, then we can say the ban was from fallible leaders who followed the racist ideologies of their time.

3) But, if the ban came from God, then we would have to say that God is "racist" because he negatively discriminated against someone based on their race.

Based on some of the posts in this discussion, it appears hard to get out of 3 being true. For example, the many examples given by @smac97 about President McKay wanting to end the ban but God saying no, don't ask me about it anymore. If 2 were true, I would imagine God would have leapt at the opportunity to correct it when his prophet was asking directly about it. Also, there have been some posts pointing out that priesthood was restricted in the past -- this also seems to be offered as justification that 3 is true.

But I can understand LDS wanting 2 to be true and it seems like recent statements (I'm not looking it up, but something like: we disavow all theories about the ban and state that racism is evil) are allowing some LDS to believe 2. But then what do those LDS do about President McKay's statements that he wanted to end it but God said no?

Am I understanding this correctly? I've been trying to follow, but obviously I don't have the background others here do. I don't mean this post as a critique, but just to lay out the contours of the situation as I see them and then to get your take on my understanding

 

I can only speak from my perspective on this. My current stance is that the start of the ban was from fallible leaders and inherently racist in both its justifications and implications. I do believe that McKay likely did get a no from God. I personally believe it had more to do with the readiness of the people and I do not see that as God necessarily promoting racism or being racist himself. 

Let me give a non-race related example from my life that could apply. I believe that God wants families that are seal together and with a mother and father to bring up children in love and patiencemore. But I was born out of wedlock. When I was younger and struggling with some of the issues in my family as well as maybe feeling a little like I was missing out of things others took for granted, I received a series of revelations that helped me realize that I was meant to come to my more complicated family. I do not see that meaning that my family is the divine structure that God would want for his children, just that I was supposed to be here in this family and at this time and that it was okay that I didn't have a sealed family governed by gospel principles just yet. I developed as needed and know that I've been blessed by the journey I've been on. God's made up the difference in my family experience 

I believe in a God that allows His people to slowly become and personally choose a more zion state. If Pres. McKay was the church at the time, I have no doubt that there would have been a correction and change in racist policy then. But he wasn't, nor is any one member the church. The church to me is the experience or "family" we're given to help us all become the order and family of God. It's by no means perfect or the ideal that God envisions for his children. That is a body of believers who are of "one heart and one mind" and where there "are no poor among them." It's a people where all truly have access to God and his covenants. It's a  It's a people that are willing to obey the Lord and in doing so, reflect the Light of Christ in their actions and behaviors to their fellow man. When the body of current believers were more willing and ready to accept black members as equals in the gospel and start shedding their prejudices and false beliefs, was when they could move forwards. We are still not fully the divine structure, but God makes up the difference and accepts our meager efforts nonetheless. So the no to me wasn't about the divinity of the practice at the time, but an indication of where the people were at in their process of becoming. Several members, including apostles, were clinging to false beliefs and couldn't shake themselves from them like McKay had. And that's okay. Thank God that getting it all right in this life is not the litmus test for how we'll stand before God in the next. 

 

I don't know if that helps, but that's how I see it from my perspective and how I can hold 2 seemingly contradictory beliefs at the same time (ie. the policy was racist and wrong but the timing for its removal was divinely revealed/inspired)

 

On your aside, yes they were able to to baptisms for the dead for blacks....though if I remember correctly not at first and after some petitioning from black members at the time to church leaders. It's been a minute though since I've read about that, so I may have that a little wrong

With luv,

BD   

  • Like 2
Link to post
  • 2 weeks later...
On 7/16/2020 at 4:43 PM, smac97 said:

I reject the notion that the sole cause of "the average Black American{'s} ... plight" is what happened to his great-great-great-great-grandparents.

There's an inference here that a Black American could have a single, distant relative who was treated unjustly - and that's it.  Speaking strictly to that inference, I offer that it may be one of the most untrue things I have ever read.

A more realistic restatement would be that Black Americans have an unbroken line of ancestors on this continent, who have had their entire lives shaped by a ceaseless state of mistreatment. Compounding that are lifetimes with countless other injustices, often subtle - sometimes overt and profound.

It bears witnessing that the lifetimes of the best possible efforts have rarely lead to meaningful changes and almost never persistent ones.

Link to post
On 8/4/2020 at 1:45 PM, smac97 said:

The same, I think, can be said with contemporary American capitalism.  It has evolved and improved over time.  And thank goodness for that.

It has gotten better in some ways and worse in others.

  • Like 2
Link to post
19 minutes ago, NoahVail said:

There's an inference here that a Black American could have a single, distant relative who was treated unjustly - and that's it.  Speaking strictly to that inference, I offer that it may be one of the most untrue things I have ever read.

A more realistic restatement would be that Black Americans have an unbroken line of ancestors on this continent, who have had their entire lives shaped by a ceaseless state of mistreatment. Compounding that are lifetimes with countless other injustices, often subtle - sometimes overt and profound.

It bears witnessing that the lifetimes of the best possible efforts have rarely lead to meaningful changes and almost never persistent ones.

I can't give you a rep. point so I'll just say that I agree.  It's the cumulative effects of decades and decades (centuries for some) of racism that we are dealing with, and not just what happened to black people until 1865.

  • Like 1
Link to post
6 hours ago, NoahVail said:

There's an inference here that a Black American could have a single, distant relative who was treated unjustly - and that's it.  Speaking strictly to that inference, I offer that it may be one of the most untrue things I have ever read.

A more realistic restatement would be that Black Americans have an unbroken line of ancestors on this continent, who have had their entire lives shaped by a ceaseless state of mistreatment. Compounding that are lifetimes with countless other injustices, often subtle - sometimes overt and profound.

It bears witnessing that the lifetimes of the best possible efforts have rarely lead to meaningful changes and almost never persistent ones.

I will not use the word "racism" simply because it has become the word du jour and creates its own baggage. I think hate, greed, prejudice, dishonesty, among many others are more appropriate because they more accurately describe the human nature and what has been done by humans to other humans from the beginning.

What you wrote above perfectly fits the Jewish people. How have their lives been shaped by a ceaseless state of mistreatment?  What is the difference and why? This is not an effort to belittle our Black brothers and sisters, but I find when conversations are only, and strictly, about what others have done it removes any choice of the individual(s). It also demeans the very humanity of the individual. Blacks do not need the great white man to ride in and save them; rather, they need the white people to get out of their way long enough that they find their own way without roadblocks and coddling they assist in keeping the foot of the white man on the neck of the Black people in this country.

Link to post
1 hour ago, Storm Rider said:

What you wrote above perfectly fits the Jewish people.

I eventually learned it was unhelpful to conflate one group's hardships with someone else's.  I did that a lot but it turned out I was always muddying the water. 

For any connection or clarity I've managed, that came thru considering other people's adversity on it's own terms and in it's own space. Basically, I just needed to respect it.

Link to post
10 hours ago, NoahVail said:

I eventually learned it was unhelpful to conflate one group's hardships with someone else's.  I did that a lot but it turned out I was always muddying the water. 

For any connection or clarity I've managed, that came thru considering other people's adversity on it's own terms and in it's own space. Basically, I just needed to respect it.

Yeah, no. Humans are humans. It is important, if not vital, to understand personal choice and the consequences that accompany each individual's choice. This has nothing to do with not respecting each individual's humanity or condition in life.

This topic talks about an entire people; it avoids the individual unfortunately. Regardless, we consistently avoid any conversation that includes the responsibilities of a people for their choices. We want to wring our hands and bemoan how terrible everyone else is toward Black people, but we throw the challenges and prejudices to the wind when we discuss the Jewish people. Both groups have dealt with horrible experiences, but have ended up in totally different social places. It is worth discovering why and how this happened - all people can learn from that discussion. Instead, we wallow in how terrible everyone is to Black people while completely avoiding any contributory factors of the Black people themselves. The point is not to absolve the wickedness of others, but to find solutions.

Hate, prejudice will always exist in the world. It will never stop. More importantly, it is important to remember that each and every people hates, is prejudiced, and is terrible to others. Not a single group avoids these social errors, but you would never guess that from the discussion today.

 

Edited by Storm Rider
Link to post
41 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

In today's world the Black people are free from sin and everyone else needs to be burned at the stake for their evilness. It is not a solution and will not end well. Worse, not a single people will learn anything. 

 

No, that's not it at all and is not what people have been saying to you here.

Edited by Meadowchik
  • Like 3
Link to post
1 hour ago, Meadowchik said:

No, that's not it at all and is not what people have been saying to you here.

I deleted that sentence; it was not the main topic, but obviously was a trigger for you. 

Link to post
11 hours ago, NoahVail said:

I eventually learned it was unhelpful to conflate one group's hardships with someone else's.  I did that a lot but it turned out I was always muddying the water. 

For any connection or clarity I've managed, that came thru considering other people's adversity on it's own terms and in it's own space. Basically, I just needed to respect it.

Wise words.

Link to post
38 minutes ago, Storm Rider said:

I deleted that sentence; it was not the main topic, but obviously was a trigger for you. 

I wouldn't say trigger, but it was a strawman and deleting it was a good choice imo.

  • Like 2
Link to post
On 8/3/2020 at 10:34 AM, smac97 said:

It usually ends up that way.

The biggest opponents of free market capitalism are usually advocates of socialism/communism.  Quite often they don't come right out and say this, though, which is why I was pointing it out.

These opponents are also the ones who seek to use the capitalism-is-bad-because-it-had-something-to-do-with-antebellum-slavery argument you are advancing here.

Racism is a great evil.  We agree on this.

Slavery was (and is) a great evil.  We agree on this.

Actually, the "point" you made that precipitated the current discussion was you attempting to disparage capitalism by tying it to slavery:

  • "In terms of America history, racism is wrapped up in its capitalism. The ownership and exploitation of Black bodies to build wealth came first. Racism was the rationale used to continue it."
  • "Do you think that American slavery was not intertwined with capitalism? Are you saying that slavery was not used to build wealth in the United States?"
  • "Slavery was enabled by capitalism."

I have disagreed with this idea, and have presented arguments and reasoning as to why.

And, with respect, I think it's fairly presumptuous of you to assert or suggest that "want{ing} to oppose racism in America" necessarily requires me to join you in denouncing the greatest and most liberating economic system every devised by man.

And again, virtually all attempts to tie slavery to "capitalism" come from advocates of socialism/communism.

In the economy of the South, yes.  In the economy that was hugely inferior to the free market (and not-based-on-slavery) economy of the North.

Thanks,

-Smac

Ending Slavery Made America Richer

  • Like 1
Link to post
45 minutes ago, jerryp48 said:

Americans were enriched by slavery while the enslaved persons were, by definition, not enriched by it and furthermore were not compensated for state-sanctioned human rights violations and theft of their lifetimes and bodies for others' use.

These seem like arguments that distract from the central moral failing of slavery and important wounds it inflicted.

  • Like 1
Link to post
33 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

Americans were enriched by slavery while the enslaved persons were, by definition, not enriched by it and furthermore were not compensated for state-sanctioned human rights violations and theft of their lifetimes and bodies for others' use.

These seem like arguments that distract from the central moral failing of slavery and important wounds it inflicted.

A few Southern aristocrats were made wealthy by slavery but it left the South economically underdeveloped.  That's in large part why they were defeated by the industrial North.  Free alienation of labor is what makes capitalism successful.  Slavery was indeed horrible and ugly but the America's economic backbone was not built on it.  It was hampered by it.

Link to post
16 minutes ago, jerryp48 said:

A few Southern aristocrats were made wealthy by slavery but it left the South economically underdeveloped.  That's in large part why they were defeated by the industrial North.  Free alienation of labor is what makes capitalism successful.  Slavery was indeed horrible and ugly but the America's economic backbone was not built on it.  It was hampered by it.

That is arguable. And again, repeating your initial point does not change the fact of the disparity of wealth between enslaved persons and their enslavers.

Link to post
2 minutes ago, Meadowchik said:

That is arguable. And again, repeating your initial point does not change the fact of the disparity of wealth between enslaved persons and their enslavers.

True but ending slavery decreased the economic disparity between us.  In capitalism the rich get richer but so do the poor.

Link to post
12 minutes ago, jerryp48 said:

True but ending slavery decreased the economic disparity between us.  In capitalism the rich get richer but so do the poor.

Decreased it, but many new types of disparities were generated and perpetuated after the abolition of slavery. Even very early on, efforts to help integrate freed people were abandoned and arguments about how they shouldn't get "something for nothing" were used.

And mistreatment with profound economic impact has continued over and over since. Pigford versus Glickman is a civil rights case from 1999, because of thousands of Black farmers being discriminated against by the US government. It's only one type of example among many.

  • Like 1
Link to post
On 7/14/2020 at 3:25 PM, Calm said:

“Have a nice day” can come across violent when said by someone thought to be violent. 

So can Hasta La Vista, Baby

Link to post

I think smac’s initial assessment about it being unfortunate that they didn’t elaborate the huge differences were. It’s impossible to address the problem when they don’t actually explain it

Link to post
On 8/17/2020 at 8:32 PM, Storm Rider said:

What you wrote above perfectly fits the Jewish people. How have their lives been shaped by a ceaseless state of mistreatment?  What is the difference and why? This is not an effort to belittle our Black brothers and sisters, but I find when conversations are only, and strictly, about what others have done it removes any choice of the individual(s). It also demeans the very humanity of the individual. Blacks do not need the great white man to ride in and save them; rather, they need the white people to get out of their way long enough that they find their own way without roadblocks and coddling they assist in keeping the foot of the white man on the neck of the Black people in this country.

Good idea, when are we going to get those roadblocks removed? Lately it has been more the knee we need to get off their neck.

On 8/18/2020 at 7:37 AM, Storm Rider said:

This topic talks about an entire people; it avoids the individual unfortunately. Regardless, we consistently avoid any conversation that includes the responsibilities of a people for their choices. We want to wring our hands and bemoan how terrible everyone else is toward Black people, but we throw the challenges and prejudices to the wind when we discuss the Jewish people. Both groups have dealt with horrible experiences, but have ended up in totally different social places. It is worth discovering why and how this happened - all people can learn from that discussion. Instead, we wallow in how terrible everyone is to Black people while completely avoiding any contributory factors of the Black people themselves. The point is not to absolve the wickedness of others, but to find solutions.

I do not recall anyone saying antisemitism is not a problem but this falls into whataboutism. You also ignore the bios distinctions. Outside of the more orthodox groups who wear distinctive clothing you cannot generally tell someone is Jewish by sight. This makes antisemitism more difficult to find a random target. If I am hiring someone or seeking someone to demean or whatever I can easily target someone who is Black but it is less easy to identify if someone is of Jewish descent and/or follows the Jewish religion. Antisemitism is also often more expressed as a kind of patronizing condescension. Hence you have people talking about hiring Jews as accountants or bankers in the same way Black people were used as boxers or workmen due to stereotyping. You are defaulting to blaming the victims of racism.

As to why African Americans have not been able to collectively pull themselves out of poverty may I suggest a review of the Tulsa Massacre, an attack on the wealthiest predominantly black neighborhood in the nation. It was destroyed. Look into the heir inheritance issues in the South that was used to repossess Black-owned land. You seem to be suggesting the boot is off and we are just waiting for them to recover and they won’t. The idea that people are wallowing in this state is generally false. It is an invention by those who want to pretend active racism is dead even while it overt forms of it are resurging. I hope it can be smashed back down.

On 8/18/2020 at 7:37 AM, Storm Rider said:

Hate, prejudice will always exist in the world. It will never stop. More importantly, it is important to remember that each and every people hates, is prejudiced, and is terrible to others. Not a single group avoids these social errors, but you would never guess that from the discussion today.

So, nothing we can do about it. Sounds pretty defeatist. There is also a great difference between hatred coming from an oppressor and hatred due to being oppressed. Is the hatred of a Jew for Germans in a concentration camp equivalent to the hatred the guard has for the Jew he is killing? I don’t think so. A Black family in the 1950s that had all their property stolen through legal trickery or outright fraud are not equally guilty to the people who perpetuated the crime.

There is a reason that White Fragility book is so divisive. Some cannot listen to a victim without desperately trying to explain it away. We got the same thing with the Floyd murder. People desperate to find some reason why he was not a “good” person so the murder can be explained as somehow roughly just. It is a terrible thing to realize the world is very unjust but until we do we cannot make it just.

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
On 8/18/2020 at 1:17 PM, jerryp48 said:

True but ending slavery decreased the economic disparity between us.  In capitalism the rich get richer but so do the poor.

This axiom is often repeated often with analogies about rising tides raising all ships but it is not universally true. The purchasing power of the average us worker has been stagnant for decades even when the “economy” was booming.

Link to post

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...